benlehman: (Default)
Add MemoryShare This Entry
posted by [personal profile] benlehman at 05:45pm on 02/05/2008
Attention atheists who say "atheists don't do horrible things in the name of their religion."

Please go read a book about the cultural revolution.
There are 73 comments on this entry. (Reply.)
 
posted by [identity profile] chris-goodwin.livejournal.com at 01:03am on 03/05/2008
Ben, if you have an argument to make, then by all means make it, and cite your sources. Why should we do your homework for you?
 
posted by [identity profile] chris-goodwin.livejournal.com at 02:31am on 03/05/2008
Okay, I did read the Wikipedia article. I'll admit it was pretty vile. On the other hand, it looks to me like it was one faction of Chinese Communism doing vile things in the name of Communism, or at least in the name of "not sharing authority over other people". If you have a source that says otherwise, I'd appreciate hearing about it.
 
posted by [identity profile] redcrosse.livejournal.com at 01:12am on 03/05/2008
Ben, I love you. Just for being you.
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 04:16pm on 03/05/2008
I love you too.
 
posted by [identity profile] anarchangel23.livejournal.com at 01:19am on 03/05/2008
Shall we call that the anti-Crusades gambit?
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 04:16pm on 03/05/2008
Sure! Or the "power hungry bastards inspire tribalism based on religious differences for their personal gain, even if those religious differences are 'believes in religion' and 'doesn't believe in religion'" argument. A better analogue to the CR would be the Salem witch trials or the inquisition, though.

yrs--
--Ben
 
posted by [identity profile] ornithoptercat.livejournal.com at 02:33am on 03/05/2008
My favorite is "no one who is intelligent/a scientist can believe in God". Usually coupled with a statement about how atheists base all their arguments on evidence.

You know what I have to say to that?

Image
 
posted by [identity profile] indie-insurgent.livejournal.com at 04:26am on 03/05/2008
Albert Einstein didn't believe in a god in any sense that most people use the word. This is a quote from The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins:

"One of Einstein's most eagerly quoted remarks is 'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.' But Einstein also said,

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 04:19pm on 03/05/2008
Einstein may not be the best argument (there are some excellent theistic physicists: I'll try to dig up some names for you.) Einstein seemed to not as much believe in God, or not believe in God, so much as believing in fucking with people's preconceptions of him.

Also, tangent.
 
posted by [identity profile] yeloson.livejournal.com at 04:17am on 03/05/2008
Wait Ben, you're saying there isn't a simple system of thought to which if the whole world subscribed, we'd live in a perfect world free of pain and disharmony?!?

*Head Explodes*

Panaceas come in all forms, sadly, they're all placebos, too.
Edited Date: 2008-05-03 04:18 am (UTC)
ext_104690: (Default)
posted by [identity profile] locke61dv.livejournal.com at 04:42am on 03/05/2008
I heard good things about Panacea-derived pills! There's even a treatment now to take the panacea plant and remove the minerals and impurities and placebos from it. The FDA won't approve it, but you can still get it at Whole Foods.
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 04:19pm on 03/05/2008
No, we just haven't found it yet :D
 
posted by [identity profile] misuba.livejournal.com at 04:59am on 03/05/2008
Religion is a way of thinking.
evilmagnus: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] evilmagnus at 03:43pm on 03/05/2008
...and so was Maoist Communism. Both killed lots of people. ;-p
evilmagnus: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] evilmagnus at 03:46pm on 03/05/2008
So you missed off Stalin and (Godwin!) Hitler, too. Although both of them, and Mao, were raised in religion. And all of them placed their political desires ahead of whatever religious beliefs, or lack thereof, they happened to subscribe to.

So, yeah. Did you get gang-banged by Richard Dawkins or something? :)
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 04:23pm on 03/05/2008
See, this I actually know about. As far as I know, Stalin was just an atheist who did bad things, in which case, whatever. I happen to know that the Cultural Revolution was an action instigated by an official Atheist government (it's in their constitution, natch) in order to, among other things, destroy elements of their society that were not atheist.

The perpetrators of the Cultural Revolution were (by and large) raised atheist, and acted under a banner of "destroying the old society, raising up the new society."

To answer the question, I'm just grouchy. And displeased with moral superiority arguments.
 
posted by [identity profile] wickedthought.livejournal.com at 03:56pm on 03/05/2008
The cultural revolution had nothing to do with atheism or Communism. It was (and is) a dictatorship. A foul, ruthless tyranny hiding behind various masks. But in the end, it is still a tyranny.

The reason the revolution attempts to destroy religion is because it wants its people to worship the state. No authority is higher than the state. If you have any religion at all in that environment, you have dissent. China doesn't want dissent, it wants pure and blind obedience.

China is not a good example to use in this context. It hasn't performed any action "in the name of atheism;" it performed actions in the name of a small number of men who wanted power at all costs. That isn't atheism, that's tyranny.
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 04:24pm on 03/05/2008
The cultural revolution had nothing to do with atheism or Communism

That's a lie.

Except if you're willing to, by the same brush, say that the Crusades, the Inquisition, and 9/11 had nothing to do with theism, because they don't have to do with theism that you like during the modern day within your culture.
 
posted by [identity profile] wunderworks.livejournal.com at 05:09pm on 03/05/2008
I have to agree with benlehman on this one. TONS of people were killed in China SPECIFICALLY because of their religious beliefs.

I'm not saying that the motivation of the GOVERNMENT (and those directly in power) was a pure, "KILL THE THEISTS!" That was just their propaganda to tighten their oligarchical control over the nation (Mao didn't run everything). HOWEVER, the lower levels of the Communist Party bought it, and on a local level just about everywhere went atheist and killed people who would not.

Just because the Wizard behind the curtain doesn't believe in his powers doesn't mean that the people of the Emerald City don't believe in his powers.
 
posted by [identity profile] lumpley.livejournal.com at 06:57pm on 03/05/2008
Your reason and your historical- and worldly perspective can't reach me. I'm angry at God.
 
posted by [identity profile] benlehman.livejournal.com at 07:00pm on 03/05/2008
If you're angry at God -- and want to stay angry at God -- reading a book on the cultural revolution would be a great recommendation anyway.

yrs--
--Ben
 
posted by [identity profile] matt-rah.livejournal.com at 09:13pm on 03/05/2008
Preach it, brother. :-)

Matt
 
posted by [identity profile] dj-clawson.livejournal.com at 07:09am on 04/05/2008
Great post.
 
posted by [identity profile] funwithrage.livejournal.com at 10:47pm on 04/05/2008
Heh. Thank you.

Most belief systems which have been at all coherent for any length of time are responsible for the death of innocents, I think. (Neopaganism hasn't been, but that's because a) we invented it in the last fifty years, contrary to what people on the Internet who think they're dragons will tell you, and b) we're nowhere near cohesive enough. Certainly historical pagan cultures were just as kill-crazed as anyone else.)

(Also: proselytizing atheists are JUST AS FUCKING BAD as proselytizing anything-the-hell-else in modern culture. I believe in Stuff. If you want to believe that I'm stupid/wicked/going to hell because you disbelieve Stuff, or believe Other Stuff, well, fuck you, but you get to think that. Try to convince me, though, and I'll unload on you with both barrels.)
 
posted by [identity profile] l-the-fangirl.livejournal.com at 02:53am on 05/05/2008
Ben, while we're on it.

To all the Mr. Dawkins of the world...

"Fundamentalist Atheism" exists. It's beleiving that religion itself is, how you say, heretical, anathema, when you look at the world.

Rather than mainstream athiesm, which is just the reasonable belief that the evidence points to no religion being correct, and forswearing religion.

I'm raised Jewish, and mostly Buddist. Jews and Buddhists don't scare me.

Chasids and Pure Land Buddhists, on the otherhand...
 
posted by [identity profile] indie-insurgent.livejournal.com at 02:58am on 05/05/2008
Dawkins actually has a scale for this, where one pole (which he does not count himself in) is "absolutely sure there is no god." He puts himself in the "Does not believe there is a god, and lives his life as though there was not one." That's a position most scientists who are atheists would take, I believe.

May

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14 15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31